Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's not all that pleasant to view any kind of a TV picture well off to the side, anyway. If you want to pay a much, much higher price for an LCD or plasma, especially in screen sizes over 60", then be my guest.
I think it's wasteful to "dump" perfectly good CRT TVs. They can be used to receive digital signals with a set-top box. My 13 and 14 year old TVs look pretty darn good when they're playing back DVDs or HDTV with my set-top box.
Ditto that.
Newer/faster/better, sure, when what I have dies or is totally obsolte. I guess that's why I don't have a ton of credit card debt like the rest of the world!
It's not all that pleasant to view any kind of a TV picture well off to the side, anyway. If you want to pay a much, much higher price for an LCD or plasma, especially in screen sizes over 60", then be my guest.
You don't even have to be "well off to the side" to lose the picture of a DLP. If you want to be a cheapskate and buy a TV with lousy picture quality, then be my guest.
If DLP's have such lousy picture quality then one of them shouldn't have showed up on the top 5 list of HDTV's that CNET has so far reviewed in 2008. Best 5 HDTVs we've reviewed in 2008 - CNET Reviews My belief that DLP's are a smarter buy gets confirmed there.
Replaced our Toshiba 32" crt with a Samsung 46" LCD. Would still have the Toshiba, but it was getting flaky. LCD is really nice, but not enough better than the CRT to replace if there were no problems.
Still have 2 crt's upstairs and an RCA Purchased in 1969 in the basement exercise area. Still has a perfect picture!
If DLP's have such lousy picture quality then one of them shouldn't have showed up on the top 5 list of HDTV's that CNET has so far reviewed in 2008. Best 5 HDTVs we've reviewed in 2008 - CNET ReviewsMy belief that DLP's are a smarter buy gets confirmed there.
Except that the bulbs are fast becoming an item not covered under extended warranties. They burn out often, and are expensive.
One of my clients has a DLP and cusses it constantly. He pays over $100 about every six months for bulbs. I'd wager it's going to end up in a dumpster shortly.
But bulbs are out. LED's are in. Some people need to get up to date about the latest in DLP technology by Samsung. They don't use bulbs. Instead they use LED's to project the picture. They're long life and should last about as long as LCD's and plasmas.
That leaves LED DLP's down to two problems that may not even concern a lot of people. First, narrower viewing angle. That problem, showing as dimming of the screen, may not be noticed unless a person stands close to the TV to watch it or lays on the floor to watch it. If viewing off to the side too much, the problem may be noticed, too.
Secondly, they can be but don't look cool like LCD's and plasmas mounted on the wall. But then I wonder if more people actually put their LCD and plasma TVs on stands, rather than going through the bother of mounting them to the wall.
Watching LDs, DVDs and SDTV it's hard to beat a good analog CRT TV like the last generation flat screen Sony CRTs. Most digital TVs look inferior doing the tasks mentioned. Such a set will have first rate blacks and contrast and no digital artifacts---worms and digital grain.
Finally medical equipment is going flat screen...more portable, easier to see...everything. Some places still have the big Cathode ray monitors and they suck.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.